Apple to release 'iBrowse' (?)
It has been commented on in a few threads already, but I feel it an important enough issue to have its own thread.
First what I think: Apple is now thoroughly in the i-buzy, they have a cartload of internet-related appz, but they do not have a browser, although that is still the main portal between individual users and the internet. Instead, their OS comes shipped with an MS-browser. In OS 9, we used to have Outlook Express as well, which has been replaced by Mail. Is it possible that there might be a similar move in 10.3 or somewhere later from Explorer to iBrowse?
I have mentioned as well that there are rumours of Apple funding/buying the Chimera project (for example, (<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/17980.html"; target="_blank">right here</a>). It would truly befit Apple, for, at least to my knowledge, they did the same with the people from SoundJam in the early days of iTunes.
Now, the article to which I link brings up an important point: the truce between MS and Apple: [quote] If Apple were to devote time and money to developing a competing browser, its actions would be seen as aggressive ones by Microsoft. Because the 1997 MS/Apple deal has expired, Apple must ensure that it hangs on to Microsoft's support, lest the software giant stop developing Office for Mac OS. <hr></blockquote> But then again, I have to wonder, what does Microsoft gain by making a FREE application for Macintosh users? Maybe Apple should buy out the Mac-Explorer team at MS...
Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
First what I think: Apple is now thoroughly in the i-buzy, they have a cartload of internet-related appz, but they do not have a browser, although that is still the main portal between individual users and the internet. Instead, their OS comes shipped with an MS-browser. In OS 9, we used to have Outlook Express as well, which has been replaced by Mail. Is it possible that there might be a similar move in 10.3 or somewhere later from Explorer to iBrowse?
I have mentioned as well that there are rumours of Apple funding/buying the Chimera project (for example, (<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/17980.html"; target="_blank">right here</a>). It would truly befit Apple, for, at least to my knowledge, they did the same with the people from SoundJam in the early days of iTunes.
Now, the article to which I link brings up an important point: the truce between MS and Apple: [quote] If Apple were to devote time and money to developing a competing browser, its actions would be seen as aggressive ones by Microsoft. Because the 1997 MS/Apple deal has expired, Apple must ensure that it hangs on to Microsoft's support, lest the software giant stop developing Office for Mac OS. <hr></blockquote> But then again, I have to wonder, what does Microsoft gain by making a FREE application for Macintosh users? Maybe Apple should buy out the Mac-Explorer team at MS...
Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
Comments
EDIT: What I meant was that they have the lead programmer working for them. I probably should have said that in the first place.
[ 09-01-2002: Message edited by: wolfeye155 ]</p>
<strong>If Apple dumped IE then why would they use OmniWeb as the default browser when they already own the Chimera project? OmniWeb is great but I think Chimera is giving it a run for its money or at least will begin to shortly. It's only in it's 0.4 stage but it's blazingly fast and has a nicer, simpler interface. Sure it need more features but they will come one day.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with you. Chimera is nice I took it off my system because it isn't all that great yet but in time it will come along and be a good browser for now I am stuck using IE but that is ok. Mozilla is good but it still has some problems, I did use it on a regular basis but the most common sites I visit you see minor differences that bug the heck out of me.
I also think it's funny how the article you linked to describes Netscape 7 as bloated when that is the exact same code that runs the engine in Chimera. Also, at 21 MB Chimera is by far the largest web browser (aside from its parent, Mozilla) - and that's without any localizations. IE is 13 MB and OmniWeb is 8 MB. Not bloated... har har!
What does Microsoft gain by shipping Internet Explorer for Mac? Two words: <a href="http://www.netlingo.com/lookup.cfm?term=mind share" target="_blank">mind share</a>. By the not-so-impressing updates that Microsoft has made for IE on OSX, it's fairly obvious that very little resources are actually devoted to its development. So, Microsoft really doesn't have anything to lose by keeping IE out for Mac.
wolfeye155: Where are you getting the idea that Apple already owns the Chimera project? It doesn't!
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
Microsoft has used IE to great advantage and after securing huge Marketshare the innovation in Browsers has died off. I'm looking for Apple to once again show us the way. They have plenty of Tech that can be integrated into a Browser. It's time.
As far as this crap
[quote]If Apple were to devote time and money to developing a competing browser, its actions would be seen as aggressive ones by Microsoft. Because the 1997 MS/Apple deal has expired, Apple must ensure that it hangs on to Microsoft's support, lest the software giant stop developing Office for Mac OS. <hr></blockquote>
This guy must not have realized that MWNY had NO mention of MS apps. Apple is no longer pandering to the whims of the Redmond Beast. I applaud that...my life doesn't depend on MS...I'm sorry for ANYONE who depends on MS.
Chimera is ok. For some reason I still don't like the gecko engine. I don't like how forms are displayed. What I am really hoping for is IE 6 and to have it be a Cocoa app.
Omniweb is just taking too damn long to make something worth while. The current browser is a joke. Hardly any nice sites work because of javascript problems, plus it's commercial. I don't think I can name another commercial browser.
I think someone needs to do something new...maybe it be Apple, that just kills every other browser, and have them make it for all platforms...Windows, Mac, and linux. That way us web designers don't have to cry when our work is displayed correctly in every browser but one.
I've always wondered why this app is buildt this way. Is it only to make it easy for developers to make help-files, or is there more to it...?
The app TextEdit also renders HTML pages with remarkable qualitiy (for a text app). So Apple clearly has a lot of html/browser-related competence. Surely they are aware that MS might pull the plug...
<strong>Omniweb is just taking too damn long to make something worth while. The current browser is a joke. Hardly any nice sites work because of javascript problems, plus it's commercial. I don't think I can name another commercial browser.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If by commercial, you mean that you have to pay for it, Opera has a commercial version. It's also a much more popular browser than OmniWeb, and is available for other platforms.
[quote]<strong>I think someone needs to do something new...maybe it be Apple, that just kills every other browser, and have them make it for all platforms...Windows, Mac, and linux. That way us web designers don't have to cry when our work is displayed correctly in every browser but one.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You shouldn't have to cry. I understand why crying used to be necessary, but comapnies are developing their browsers to *gasp!* render code the way that it should be, and actually stick to W3C standards. If your code is written correctly, then you shouldn't have a problem.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Stroszek ]</p>
Of course, to really be on top of things we'd need CSS2, XSLT, etc. But this is a start down the right path.
You can bet it will have a brushed metal interface. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I forgot that Opera was commercial. How do you pay for these two crap browsers when IE and Mozilla are free? This seems very weird to me.
My code is always strictly html 4 compliant. Always error free. So don't give me that crap. I use BBEdit to double check it.
[quote]Originally posted by Stroszek:
<strong>
You shouldn't have to cry. I understand why crying used to be necessary, but comapnies are developing their browsers to *gasp!* render code the way that it should be, and actually stick to W3C standards. If your code is written correctly, then you shouldn't have a problem.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Stroszek ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also think it's funny how the article you linked to describes Netscape 7 as bloated when that is the exact same code that runs the engine in Chimera.<hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
There is that little issue with Netscape 7 being based on FizzillaCFM, which uses code originally designed for Mac OS 9...
<strong>Hardly any browser displays things the way they should be. There are so many bugs still. Yes things are getting better, but it's still got a long way to go.
<snip>
My code is always strictly html 4 compliant. Always error free. So don't give me that crap. I use BBEdit to double check it.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Glad to know your code is compliant. If you know of browser bugs, do you <a href="http://www.webstandards.org/act/bug/"; target="_blank">report them?</a> From everything that I have read, Mozilla, Netscape 6+, and MSIE are all standards compliant. Do you know something I don't?
[Edit: I wasn't trying to give you crap, sorry if it came off that way.]
[ 08-27-2002: Message edited by: Stroszek ]</p>
It's not because the give you iTunes that I (in 9 at least) stopped using SoundApp, or SoudJam, occasionally.
It's not because they gave me iPhoto that I stopped using ImageViewer or Photoshop.
But the free availibility of these apps, iTunes, iPhoto, Mail, in the OS, are among the top reasons cited when people explain why they think that 'Mac is better'.
And so I feel Apple should be ashamed for not having a proper internet browser.
And oh yeah, about this question:
[quote] How do you propose Apple can buy an open-source project ... <hr></blockquote>
I don't propose this as such, actually, I just think it would make sense if they decided they pay the guy to come work for them, and put up a small team to work with him.
[ 08-27-2002: Message edited by: der Kopf ]</p>
<strong>For example, it's not because they ship their OS with Mail.app, that people wouldn't be able to keep using their preferred mail reader (Eudora or Entourage spring to mind).</strong><hr></blockquote>There's a big difference here -- where are the good and free Mail apps out for OSX? Specifically, were there even any available when OSX was first released? Neither Eudora nor Entourage are free and I know Entourage was available until 10.1 (I don't know about Eudora). For browsing the internet, however, Microsoft already had a version of Internet Explorer ready for Mac OS X DP3. OmniWeb had a beta available during the Public Beta.
Apple already had Mail.app from their acquisition of NeXT. Look at the NeXT version of Mail beside the Public Beta version of Mail -- they're virtually identical. Apple bundled it for two reasons AFAICT. One, there was no other decent client available and two, they already had the bulk of the code from NeXT.
[quote]<strong>And so I feel Apple should be ashamed for not having a proper internet browser.</strong><hr></blockquote>Ashamed? Maybe. But what can they do about it? It's taken Mozilla FIVE YEARS to get where it is now. OmniWeb has been around even longer than that! Developing a browser requires *significant* manpower and resources, especially if you want it to be compliant with modern technologies and new code.
But what about the HTML.framework Apple has? That thing is *not* up to spec with modern web code. Tables are awful. CSS is practically nonexistant. JavaScript is practically nonexistant. DHTML is practically nonexistant. On top of all that, it's slow. If anyone plans to make a browser out of this, they'll be the only one using it.
[quote]<strong>I just think it would make sense if they decided they pay the guy to come work for them, and put up a small team to work with him.</strong><hr></blockquote>What "guy"? If you are referring to Mozilla, I mentioned in the other thread that there could be thousands of people working on Mozilla, from major code to bug reports to bug fixes. If you are referring to Chimera, that's a similar situation with many people working with the code.
[ 08-27-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
David Hyatt, author of Chimera.
You make some good points, Brad. Still, about Mail, couldn't it be so that Microsoft decided to discontinue Outlook Express because Mac told them they planned on releasing Mail? In any case, that's a bit post factum, I agree.
[quote] But what about the HTML.framework Apple has? That thing is *not* up to spec ... <hr></blockquote>
[quote] Developing a browser requires *significant* manpower and resources, <hr></blockquote>
I'm not into writing browsers myself, but that's why I and other people on the net suggest that Apple has bought / should buy another company / experts for that purpose. And then to finish: I seem to be hearing a lot of people talking about Apple's billions (2 or 4?) of dollars they have in the bank. Surely a few million are available for their pride?
<strong>David Hyatt, author of Chimera.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well...
A) David Hyatt already works for Apple. Check out his <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/weblogs/hyatt/2002_07_14_mozillian_archive.html"; target="_blank">weblog archives</a>.
C) Hyatt has already moved on to working on a Mozilla subproject called Pheonix--a non-Mac browser-only version of Mozilla with a better user interface (recognize <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/weblogs/hyatt/toolbarcustom.png"; target="_blank">this</a>?)
D) Hyatt has handed the Chimera project over to Mike Pinkerton who was already the head Mac guy at Mozilla.
Thanks for posting exactly what I was about to say.